Hon'ble Judges/Coram:
K.G. Balakrishnan, C.J., Dr. Arijit Pasayat, H.S. Bedi, P. Sathasivam and J.M. Panchal

JUDGMENT

Arijit Pasayat, J.

1. On a reference made by a Bench of three Judges in Commissioner of Central Excise, Bolpur v. v. Ratan Melting and Wire Industries, Calcutta   MANU/SC/0137/2005 : 2005(181)ELT364(SC) , these matters were placed before this Bench. The reference was necessitated because of certain observations by a Constitution Bench in Collector of Central Excise v. Dhiren Chemical Industries   MANU/SC/0787/2001 : [2002]254ITR554(SC) . During the hearing of the appeal before the three-Judge Bench it was fairly conceded by the parties that the decision of this Court in Collector of Central Excise, Patna v. Usha Martin Industries   MANU/SC/0960/1997 : 1997ECR257(SC) on which the Customs, Excise and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal placed reliance was over- ruled by the subsequent decision of the Constitution Bench in Dhiren Chemical's case (supra). But learned Counsel for the assessee-respondent submitted that paragraph 11 of Dhiren Chemical's case (supra) operates in its favour. It reads as under:

We need to make it clear that regardless of the interpretation that we have placed on the said phrase, if there are circulars which have been issued by the Central Board of Excise and Customs which place a different interpretation upon the said phrase, that interpretation will be binding upon the Revenue.

2. It was noted by the three-Judge Bench that the effect of the aforesaid observations was noted in several decisions. In Kalyani Packaging Industry v. Union of India and Anr.   MANU/SC/0527/2004 : 2004(168)ELT145(SC) , it was noted as follows: